On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 00:08 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
Craig White wrote:
> Things like flash player, though free are not open source and are
> available in binary format only which creates an issue if distributed in
> conjunction with software that is GPL license.
Please, research this point and show is what the problem is.
I believe there is not problem distributing GPL and non-free software as
part of the same collation.
----
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#OrigBSD
----
The problem Red Hat has is that it cannot support flash, java and such.
Red Hat got burned with CDE some years ago; I imagine this is a factor
in its current attitude. Other vendors do distribute varying amounts of
closed-source software.
----
http://www.macromedia.com/licensing/distribution/faq/#item-1-9
----
>
> Then there are patent issues as Rahul suggested with things like audio
> and video codecs/formats which could present a sticky wicket for a
> distribution.
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
----
heck - we don't even understand cricket.
;-)
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sti2.htm
Craig